Abstract:

The inquiry into the essence of organisms has long been a thriving topic in biology and philosophy. Hypothesises are commonly employed in biological research to understand lives. These hypothesises can be grouped into two categories: ① the machine hypothesis, likening the components and organizational structure of organisms to the operation of machines, and ② the autopoietic hypothesis, likening organisms to complex systems with purposeful and unique attributes. Both play an epistemic role in various fields of biology, serving as theoretical hypotheses, heuristic tools, and means of scientific communication. The machine hypothesis, for instance, has been influential in areas such as molecular biology and systems biology, where organisms are viewed as intricate machines made up of interacting components. The autopoietic hypothesis, on the other hand, has been more prominent in theoretical biology and philosophy of biology, highlighting the self-organizing and self-producing nature of living systems. The development of synthetic biology, which aims to redesigning and constructing biological systems from scratch, has challenged the traditional dichotomy between natural and artificial entities. Both the machine and autopoietic hypothesises are reflected in the advancement of synthetic biology, as researchers attempt to engineer living systems using principles and methods adapted from various disciplines, including engineering, computer science, and materials science. While the hypothesises serve epistemic purposes, their usage also raises some controversies, particularly in the context of synthetic biology. The conflation of ontology and epistemology, where hypothesises are mistaken for literal descriptions of reality, can lead to ethical concerns. For example, the machine hypothesis may suggest that organisms are merely complicated machines to be manipulated, potentially diminishing their intrinsic value and ethical status. This article examines the origin and clarification of these two hypothesises, their applications in synthetic biology, and addresses the potential confusions and ethical implications arising from their usage. It advocates for a cautious approach to the usage of the epistemological hypothesis, considering both its epistemic impact and ethical consequence. As synthetic biology continues to advance, it is crucial to maintain a critical and nuanced understanding of hypothesises employed, recognizing their heuristic value while also acknowledging their limitations and potential pitfalls. The discussion of hypothesises for organism origins in the context of synthetic biology highlights the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and dialogue between scientists, philosophers, and ethicists. By examining the philosophical and ethical issues of hypothesises, we can better navigate the complex and rapidly evolving landscape of synthetic biology, ensuring that our scientific endeavors are guided by a deep appreciation for the intricate and multifaceted nature of lives.

Key words: synthetic biology, organisms, hypothesis, autopoietic systems, machine

摘要：

对有机体本质的追问，一直是生物学和哲学久盛不衰的话题。在生物学研究中，经常使用隐喻来认识和理解生命现象。回顾生物学的发展历史，有机体的隐喻可以分为两类：①机器隐喻，将有机体的部件与组织方式类比为机器的运作；②自主系统隐喻，将有机体类比为具有目的性和独特属性的复杂系统。两种隐喻在生物学各个领域发挥认知作用，例如理论假说、启发式工具、科学传播的作用。在隐喻发挥认知作用的同时，也有隐喻使用的一些争议，这个问题在合成生物学的语境下，显得尤为重要。合成生物学旨在通过整合生命科学、化学、物理学、材料科学、计算机科学，利用工程学方法重新设计、从头设计生物系统。合成生物学的发展挑战了自然物/人工物的二分，也为重新理解有机体的本质和方式带来了机遇，从生物元件到合成生命系统，两种隐喻在合成生物学的发展中都有所体现。本文通过对两种隐喻概念的溯源和澄清以及两种隐喻在合成生物学中的应用，分析有机体隐喻使用中的本体隐喻/认识论隐喻的混淆问题，并说明在合成生物学的语境下，隐喻混淆带来的认知作用和伦理上的争议，例如过度依赖本体隐喻带来认知上的误导作用、隐喻混淆对合成有机体内在价值、道德地位的不当判断等。基于这些讨论，本文将辩护一种认识论隐喻的立场，不论从隐喻的认知作用还是伦理后果，都应谨慎使用隐喻。

关键词: 合成生物学, 有机体, 隐喻, 自主系统, 机器